Hey, help me out by
recommending the journal on BOR so the young dems will see it... this is from the crackplog.
PS: Is there any dang way to just import the HTML and have it formatted correctly? I've hit most of the tags here and switched them but may have missed one or two. What a pain.
In the past, you've seen me
point out the hypocrisy of two or three folks heavily involved in the McMansion Task Force for living in homes which violated the expressed spirit, if not technically the letter, of the ordinance. The spirit being "out-of-scale houses (McGraw) and/or homes which 'tower over the backyards of their neighbors' (Maxwell)".
Somehow, I missed this.
Laura Morrison chaired this task force - and lives in a home which,
according to TravisCAD, is worth $1.4 million and has <b>8,537 square feet</b>. Pretty big, but I had previously assumed it fit well within the 0.4 FAR required by McMansion. Yes, this is a big old historic house, but that's not the metric of the ordinance (it doesn't say "big houses are OK if they are stunners", after all).
A few days ago, though, I was alerted by a reader that Morrison's lot is actually too small -- but she's not subject to the ordinance anyways, because according to said reader,
her lot is zoned MF-4 (the McMansion ordinance only applies to single-family zoning). A little history here: the Old West Austin neighborhood plan (which I worked on in a transportation capacity) allowed landowners to choose to downzone their lots from multi-family (most of the area was zoned that way after WWII even though existing uses were houses) to single-family (SF-3) if the property was still being used that way. Apparently Morrison passed on this opportunity (many others took it up; I remember seeing dozens of zoning cases come up before City Council on the matter).
So let's check it out. Unfortunately, TravisCAD doesn't have the lot size,
but Zillow does.
Home size: 8537 square feet
Lot size: 20,305 square feet
FAR (before loopholes): 0.42
Caveats: I do not know if Morrison is using the property in ways which would be comforming with SF-3, but I found it very interesting that
her ads are attacking Galindo for building duplexes which actually comply with her ordinance yet the home she herself lives in would be non-compliant in a similar scenario, or require loopholes to comply. It's often referred to as a "converted four-plex", and the owners' address is "Apt 9", which may suggest continuing multi-family use, which would also be evidence of hypocrisy given her stand against any and all multi-family development in the area except for a few cases
where that plan mentioned above quite effectively tied her hands. Either way,
Morrison clearly broke the spirit of her own ordinance and her own activism against multi-family housing, and anyways
when you write the ordinance, as she did, it's really easy to make sure your own property is just barely compliant. You notice that you're right over the edge; so you exempt attached carports, for instance, which, oops, you just happen to have!
Again, I can't believe I missed her the first time around - her hypocrisy on this ordinance is more odious than that of McGraw and Maxwell combined. I apologize for my lack of diligence on this matter.
(Hey, BATPAC: yes, your latest
cowardly anonymous attack on me did indeed motivate me to finally take the time to write this! Good show! And I feel very confident that my readers find your accusation that I "like Republicans" to be one of the funniest things they've read in quite some time!)
Linear Mode
